It is still early to tell that the ongoing Barangay and SK Elections is relatively peaceful. The number of election related violent incidents have already surpassed the 2007 Barangay and SK elections mark and it is still rising considering the elections in most barangays are still ongoing. One COMELEC commissioner has prematurely announced that the lesser number of election related violent incidents were mainly due to the total gun ban that they imposed, how I wish he will study the statistics again. the truth is that with a total gun ban the number of election related violent incidents rose to more than the acceptable limits! The only difference between the two elections was that there were exemptions for qualified gunowners in 2007 while there was none during these last elections and this fact have emboldened the guns for hires and professional hitmen to peddle their trade because they knew that responsible gun owners will be forced to park their firearms at home in compliance with the order of the COMELEC. The alarming rate is another faux pas of the Versoza legacy in the PNP-less guns less crimes- or is it less guns for the PNP less crimes- the seeming hypocricy of mega proportions among our law enforcers has been the number one argument against gun control in this country. The PNP has been spending taxpayers’ money in paying for their technical working groups crafting bills which do not pass at all. Why not spend the money for firearms education instead? Why don’t the PNP set educational and instructional programs to teach the next generation of Filipinos to be peaceful and responsible gun owners? Instead of having a gun control point of view, why not a gun educated citizenry which will also be the partner of the PNP in the maintenance of peace and order. The best “force multipliers” are armed and responsible citizens who can be on call in times of calamities and lawlessness.

The COMELEC in an eleventh hour resolution has decided to grant the exemption of judges and prosecutors from the total gun ban. But how about private prosecutors and defense counsel who share the same amount of death threats with them? Are they not entitled to the same privilege? Is it because they are in government service make them more qualified to an exemption than the PAO lawyers, Private Prosecutors and Defense counsel? Lingering in our minds are these questions which tends to draw the conclusion that anyone in government is entitled to be a firearms owner and not in the civilian sector. But how do we consider the far more superior training that civilians received and the equipment that they use? Can we just dismiss the civilians as not qualified or non compost mentis? Of course, we beg to disagree because we believe that if they are qualified to be exempted from the total gunban due to their service to the government, we private prosecutors, defense counsel and even PAO lawyers must likewise be entitled to the same privilege.

I will reserve my judgment. I have yet to see the final tally and the announcement has yet to be done. But for sure, I can bet one of my 1911s that this election has far more than election related violent incidents than in 2007 where gun ban exemptions were issued by the government.

In the meantime, I rest my case.